Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:48:26 +0300 | From | Indrek Kruusa <> | Subject | Re: How's the nforce4 support in Linux? |
| |
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Indrek Kruusa wrote: > >> Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >>> Andi Kleen wrote: >>> >>>> Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> I won't disagree with your experiences. For me, outside of one brief >>>>> moment when the r8169 driver didn't work on Athlon64, it has worked >>>>> flawlessly for me. >>>>> >>>>> RealTek 8169 is currently my favorite gigabit chip. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It does not seem to support DAC (or rather it breaks with DAC >>>> enabled), which makes it not very useful on any machine with >3GB >>>> of memory. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Driver bug. I can futz with it and get it to do 64-bit on my Athlon64. >> >> >> >> >> Continuing with off-topic questions: is this "checksum off-load" >> usable with r8169? Is there any other reason (performance?) to use >> hardware TCP/IP checksumming than just "cool, a little chunk of >> software is hardwired again"? > > > It's usable, and enables "zero copy" feature. > > >> I have seen you mentioned that this causes mainly troubles if you try >> to set it with ethtool. Is it still true? > > > Not sure what you are referring to.
Sorry - my brains interpretation was classic rumor case: discussion I remembered was about broken NIC not about enabling hw checksum. I referred to this one:
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0503.3/0369.html
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > >> Noone will complain on Linux if NIC is broken and produces wrong >> checksum >> and HW checksum offloading is enabled using ethtools. > > > > Actually, that is a problem and people have definitely complained > about it in the past.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |